ReviewAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2024
The role of empiric atypical antibiotic coverage in non-severe community-acquired pneumonia.
Review in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Streamlining antibiotic use in community acquired pneumonia: A quality improvement initiative.Journal of hospital medicine · 2026Observational
- The elusive concept of appropriate antibiotic for septic patients when a pathogen is not detected by standard culture methods.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A β-lactam plus a macrolide or a respiratory fluoroquinolone alone is recommended as standard empiric antibacterial therapy for non-severe adults hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) per Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines. However, the evidence in support of adding empiric atypical antibacterial therapy, and specifically the addition of a macrolide, is conflicting and should be balanced with additional factors: the necessity of covering atypical organisms, benefits of macrolide-associated immunomodulation, harms associated with antibiotic use, and selection for antibiotic-resistant organisms. In this review, we examine the role of atypical coverage in standard treatment regimens for patients admitted with non-severe CAP and specifically focus on the addition of macrolides to β-lactams. We conclude that a subset of patients should not be given atypical coverage as part of their regimen.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.